Difference between revisions of "Network/Lib/Meetings"
(→Open Discussion) |
(→Open Discussion) |
||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
* We have a [https://review.openstack.org/#/c/340580/ dev-ref change] discussing public API source doc strings. What do you guys think about just saying all public code needs doc string and perhaps adding a hacking check for it? | * We have a [https://review.openstack.org/#/c/340580/ dev-ref change] discussing public API source doc strings. What do you guys think about just saying all public code needs doc string and perhaps adding a hacking check for it? | ||
* Are we still interested in a tool to generate a [https://review.openstack.org/#/c/338571/ public api report]? If so; do we really "care" how pretty this tool is? | * Are we still interested in a tool to generate a [https://review.openstack.org/#/c/338571/ public api report]? If so; do we really "care" how pretty this tool is? | ||
− |
Revision as of 15:40, 20 July 2016
Meeting time: The neutron-lib sub-Team (Neutron-Lib) holds public meetings on Wednesdays at 1730 UTC in the #openstack-meeting-4 channel on Freednode. Everyone is encouraged to attend.
Announcements / Reminders
- None this week
Current Work Items
- Using the lib in neutron - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/268232/
- Moving base db gunk - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/267214/
Open Discussion
[boden]
- What changes are applicable to release notes? For example; new public APIs, updates/enhancements to behavior in existing public APIs, etc.
- Infra plumbing status? From last week --> "still pending to allow checking against neutron-lib master"
- We have a dev-ref change discussing public API source doc strings. What do you guys think about just saying all public code needs doc string and perhaps adding a hacking check for it?
- Are we still interested in a tool to generate a public api report? If so; do we really "care" how pretty this tool is?